Summary
The Biden administration will allow California to ban new gas-powered car sales by 2035, with 11 other states following. This uses a Clean Air Act waiver permitting stricter state-level pollution controls to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
Trump plans to revoke the waiver, roll back EV tax credits, and fight California’s climate policies, potentially sparking legal battles.
California, leading the U.S. in EV adoption, aims to “Trump-proof” its agenda, bolstered by automaker deals and strong market influence.
The ban could accelerate EV investments, shaping nearly half of the U.S. auto market and global climate policy trends.
2035 is so far away, it’s basically just postering at this point.
It makes a difference - corporations move and adapt slowly. They now know in 10 years, the ICE market will probably be completely dead in big chunks of the US market, and if they aren’t competitive by then they’ll lose a lot of market share
It’s not enough to sell electric models by 2035 - they need to be established as good electric manufacturers by then. It’ll push them to move the electric transition forward, either giving up on hydrogen or speeding up their plans
It’s not the greatest timeframe, but it’s not nothing
According to this article, some automotive companies have already stopped further research and development on ICE engines.
https://www.hotcars.com/car-companies-no-longer-investing-in-ice/
Just posturing is right. Why not in 5 years? Why wait til we can almost name a new generation of adults?
Probably because the more aggressive the timeline, the more willingness to fight rather than just adapt
Personally, I’d like to see more of a transition - maybe a tax that starts small and quickly scales into something crazy over the course of the decade or something else to heavily motivate early compliance
This isn’t nothing though, it’s mostly just late. Paris did something similar and is already reaping the rewards
Funny how they care about the rights of states selectively.
What is Elon going to do? Sell cars or kiss Trump’s ass?
Why not both?
Introduce a hypothetical Tesla Backcountry, Elon’s “unique” solution for people with range anxiety. Instead of worrying about charge stations, the Backcountry can be recharged at any old gas station by filling it up with “liquid x power,” which the car burns to recharge its battery while running. It’s not a hybrid, it’s electric /s
This just made me think of Petrol electric vehicles, more specifically the Ferdinand/Elefant. Knowing how flammable Teslas already are I feel like a gas powered one would be outright explosive.
Knowing how flammable Teslas already are I feel like a gas powered one would be outright explosive.
You might be interested in looking up ICE vehicle fire statistics in your area every year. It’s going to be more than every electric vehicle fire to date. They are common, so they don’t make headlines, no one would click on the link for the advertising revenue.
TIL
The two Porsche Type 101 15-litre gasoline V-10 air-cooled engines each developing 310 PS in each vehicle had considerable problems with cooling difficulties and excess oil consumption during testing.[5] An improved type 101/2 engine with better cooling seems not to have been installed.[6] The Porsche engines were replaced by two 300 PS (296 hp; 221 kW) Maybach HL120 TRM engines. The engines drove a single Siemens-Schuckert 500 kVA generator each, which powered two Siemens 230 kW (312.7 PS) individual-output electric motors, one each connected to each of the rear sprockets. The electric motors also acted as the vehicle’s steering unit. This “petrol–electric” drive delivered 0.11 km/L (909 litres/100 km or 0.26 miles per gallon) off-road and 0.15 km/L (667 litres/100 km or 0.35 mpg) on road at a maximum speed of 10 km/h off-road and 30 km/h on road. In addition to this high fuel consumption and poor performance, the vehicle was maintenance-intensive; the sprockets needed to be changed every 500–900 km.[7] Furthermore, the radiators for the water-cooled Maybach engines took up extra space in the cramped engine compartment, and the engines often over-heated.[8]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elefant
TIL also why I think the Soviets won the Battle of Kursk.
I didn’t see anything in the article about this, but does the regulation also ban hybrid vehicles? Just curious.
It would be a bit funny if like… Chevy bolt = cool, Chevy volt = illegal
So the state can ban the sale? Ban the usage? What exactly can they ban?
They can restrict the sale and the registration (license plate/tabs) of new gas cars within the state. Someone can still go to another state to buy one, but they can’t get a CA plate for it. And that’s on top of trying to figure it how to get insurance coverage for it.
So essentially its a law that only effects the poor who cant afford to get out of state sale/rego/insurance?
If everyone could get easy, cheap car insurance outside of their home state or region, don’t you think it would be a widespread phenomena already?
They can ban the sale. They can also refuse to register the car, so no license plate. You’d get in a fair amount of trouble if caught driving an unregistered vehicle.
They can also refuse to register the car,
Virginia has a model for this that can be a tad regressive; not sure about CA. On the one hand, there’s regular safety and emissions tests that must be passed or you cannot (re)register your car for the coming year or two. This more or less keeps deathtraps and oil-burning-smog-machines off the road. On the other hand, it has absolutely crippled plenty of households just scraping by where that old car is needed to just break even every month. Depending on where one stands on car-dependent culture and if owning/operating a vehicle is a necessity, it can be quite the contentious issue.
Point being, I can easily see how a higher bar for registration, and re-registration, can change the makeup of what’s on the road. I can also see how that can suddenly prevent a whole chunk of the population from participating.